This article by leading American economist, Michael Boskin, published in the Japan Times is a must-read. Boskin is best known for serving as chair of the Council of Economic Advisors under George H. W. Bush and as Chairman of a Congressional Advisory Commission on the Consumer Price Index.
Boskin argues that if British voters are to make the right choice about remaining in the EU, they will have to cut through the hyperbolic claims being made by leaders on both sides.
The article carefully and simply sets outs some of the risks and opportunities. However, Boskin comes off the fence with a powerful and thoughtful conclusion namely:
But if the U.K. exits now, its options become severely limited. In particular, future changes to its relationship with the EU, especially a future re-entry, if desirable, would be difficult to negotiate (perhaps especially given European leaders’ desire to deter other member states from following the U.K.’s example). Indeed, it could entail worse terms than Cameron has secured for his country should it remain in the EU.
The bottom line is that the Brexit route is just too risky. Yesterday, we saw that Paul Krugman share that the cost of the Brexit would be 2% of the UK’s GDP to perpetuity.
It’s a bit bizarre that we need an American professor, writing in a Japanese newspaper, to give us a balanced view on the Brexit. Perhaps, we also need to reflect on a leading Turkish newspaper highlighting Turkey’s determination to become full member of the EU too?
Again I maintain that the Brexiteers are primarly about one issue, fear of increased immigration. Whereas, the Remain campaign is about a whole range of policies. For me, the Remain campaign is costed and risk assessed. By comparison, you can’t ‘kick the tyres’ of the Brexiteers’ case because it’s a moving target – scary.